Red Line in Bangladesh-India Relations

I begin by expressing my sincere gratitude to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman. I particularly appreciate Foreign Minister Khalilur Rahman and his ministry for their strong response to Sheikh Hasina’s live news conference in Delhi. India’s conduct demanded a firm response: like dog, like stick. For sixteen years, Bangladesh under Sheikh Hasina maintained what could only be described as a “Yes Sir” administration toward India. From 2009 to August 5, 2024, Delhi treated the Awami League government as a subordinate. This time, India received a tooth-shattering response. The Ministry has not used such language in a long time.

India regards Chanakya, or Kautilya, as a role model in diplomacy. Born in 350 BC, he preceded Niccolò Machiavelli by 1,819 years; Machiavelli was born in 1469 AD. The Prince is Machiavelli’s legendary work; Arthashastra is Chanakya’s treatise on governance. “Chanakya-buddhi” describes the supposed political intelligence of India’s leaders and their ability to outmanoeuvre foreign politicians. This time, Bangladesh’s direct position challenged that reputation. Following Dhaka’s statement, Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal said on Saturday, August 8, that India did not agree with Hasina’s statements.

Sheikh Hasina, currently hiding in India, had announced from Indian soil that she would hold the event on August 5 to announce the date of her return to Bangladesh. She had said she would return by December. Her announcement was largely ignored in Bangladesh but caused controversy in Indian media. August 5 is an unforgettable day for Bangladesh. Millions took to the streets in 2024. Hasina sought to retain power by firing on the mass movement. On August 3, officers from junior to senior ranks said they would not shoot unarmed civilians to preserve Hasina’s authority.

August 3 marked the end of her reign. Her August 5 announcement appeared to many Bangladeshis as an attempt to tarnish a day sacred to the movement and its martyrs. Dhaka had asked India to prevent the press conference. Fearing public outrage, Hasina fled to India, where she was accused of genocide and sentenced to death by a Bangladeshi court. Under the Bangladesh-India extradition treaty, India should promptly transfer her to Bangladesh. India instead called the press conference private and cited freedom of speech. That reveals a double standard.

India has long insisted that Bangladesh prevent anti-Indian activities on Bangladeshi territory. During his nearly 17 years in Bangladesh, Anup Chetia never engaged in politics. India repeatedly demanded that Bangladesh respect its security concerns. Bangladesh has reminded India of that principle. Thousands of Sheikh Hasina’s supporters and associates have allegedly engaged in political activities against Bangladesh from Indian territory. Can an Indian-protected fugitive conduct anti-Bangladeshi politics from Indian soil without India’s knowledge or consent?

Dhaka instructed its media not to broadcast Hasina’s remarks. We have the complete video but have refrained from commenting because we respect the law. Hasina described the July Revolution as a “conspiracy”, a claim she has promoted from Indian territory for two years. The Foreign Ministry was therefore justified in criticising India despite Dhaka’s warning. Its statement said: “Bangladesh is outraged that the fleeing accused genocider Sheikh Hasina was allowed this evening to engage in live interaction with the media in New Delhi, where she and her goons launched vulgar hatred against the State of Bangladesh and her people.”

It declared: “On a day when the people of Bangladesh are observing the second anniversary of the July Revolution, this interaction by Sheikh Hasina on Indian soil stands as an outrage to the sovereignty of Bangladesh and a grievous insult to the martyrs of the July Revolution.” Sheikh Hasina and her allies were described as “absconding convicted mass murderers” seeking to “reverse the tide of history.” It reaffirmed: “Our people have firmly resolved that our nation will never again go back to the dark days of fascism and that Bangladesh will never be a client State, upholding the spirit of the July Revolution.”

It added: “Allowing her the opportunity to openly interact with the media under any circumstance is deeply hurtful to our people’s sentiment and damaging to the development of peaceful diplomatic ties between Bangladesh and India.” Hasina and her political network will not return to Bangladeshi politics. India has misread the Tarique Rahman administration. These misconceptions should have been corrected earlier. Delhi appears to have forgotten the July Revolution slogan: “Delhi or Dhaka? Dhaka, Dhaka.”

After 15 years and seven months of servile governance under Hasina, Dr Muhammad Yunus’s interim administration established a different relationship with India. If India believes it can use American diplomats such as Sergio Gorges to overthrow or destabilise the government, it is misguided. Its 180 million citizens will no longer accept what they regard as Indian imperial influence. The Tarique Rahman government has heard the people.

Bangladesh does not reject India or mutually beneficial relations with its neighbour. It rejects subordination. Bangladesh-India relations must be based on equality, mutual respect, reciprocity and sovereignty. The era of a compliant Dhaka answering “Yes Sir” to Delhi is over. That is the red line.